More game developers whining about used games...

theBlackman on 20/5/2011 at 22:47

Nameless Voice Actually I'm talking about both. I do buy "second hand" games, computers, and other items.

As for the games, if the original purchaser wants to sell it to me and the price is agreeable to me I buy. He has, or should have the right to dispose of it and recoup some of his expenditure, just as I should, and do, in most cases have the right to save a buck buying a book, a movie, a game or whatever.

Papy on 20/5/2011 at 23:21

Quote Posted by Kuuso

The reason for buying a game is always, above everything else, because you want what it gives to you.

That may be a good reason for people who don't know how to pirate games, but for those who know how to pirate, why bother paying for a used game instead of just pirating it?

Quote Posted by Kuuso

Piracy is a symptom of excessive prices

Most people I know make at the very least $40,000 a year. A few of them have a family income which is around $150,000 a year. And yet, they do pirate their games and their music. They have no problem paying $100 to eat at a good restaurant, but they do think $50 is way too much for a video game. They also think 99 cents is too much for a song. Piracy is not a symptom of excessive prices, it is a symptom of people being greedy.

Quote Posted by Kuuso

This is backed up by the success of "reasonably" priced games

How do you judge if a game is "reasonably priced"? What is the reasonable price for a game which cost $15,000,000 to produce?

Quote Posted by theBlackman

I Buy a game because "the laborer is worth his hire".

Considering the money you pay for a used game do not go to the laborer, why would you ever pay for a used game?

Quote Posted by theBlackman

That said, once I pay for it, the physical item is mine to dispose of as I wish.

The biggest mistake the industry made with music, movies, books and video games is that they didn't separate the right to have access to a product and the physical support for that product. Because of that, people like you think that they pay $50 for a box, a manual and a piece of plastic (which are worth no more than a few dollars at most).

I think they should create "certificates" to attest that you have rights to a particular intellectual property and they should sell those "certificates" and the physical items separately. That way, people like you would not be as confused.

Quote Posted by theBlackman

As for the cost of living increase you mentioned. That is a fishy argument. A relative of a friend of mine bought 500 Acres of downtown Phoenix Arizona in the 1800's for $0.25 per square foot. The fact that that same square foot is worth in the area of $20,000.00 now is a specious comparison.

OK. Since you don't grasp what inflation means, I'll explain it differently. A game in 1980 was the equivalent of about 4 or 5 hours of work and people didn't whine. Now it's about 2, for games which are incredibly better than what they were in 1980 (really, you should play with an Atari 2600 game to see how bad they were), and people like you whine that games are not good enough and that they cost too much. I'm sorry, but people who complain that games are not good enough and cost too much are just full of shit. This is nothing more than a lame excuse to be a greedy bastard.

Quote Posted by hooded_paladin

Hang on, sir Nameless.
Lots of people buy games with the idea in mind that they'll be able to sell it when they're finished or if they don't like it. The secondary market isn't "pointless" as it results in more sales.

This would be true only if the people who were buying used games instead of new ones wouldn't buy the game otherwise. As I don't think that's the case (the difference in price is not high enough), the result is really less sales.

OK. I'll explain it in a simplistic way...

Suppose two persons have each a $500 budget a year for video games.

Scenario 1 : Both those persons buy ten $50 games.

Scenario 2 : Person A buy 10 games at $50, resell them at $10, so he can buy two more (total 12). Person B buy those 10 used games at $25 (but those sell doesn't count since the money is just for a middleman) and then buy 5 games with the $250 left.

With scenario 1 (no used games), the developer sold 20 games. With scenario 2, the developer sold 17 games.

Of course, in reality money is not the only thing which limits how many video games people buy. Time is an important factor. This means that person B will probably have enough with his 10 used games and will instead spend is $250 left for something else and the total number of game sold will be 12, not 20.

Eldron on 20/5/2011 at 23:23

Quote Posted by negativeliberty

I'd love to know how many gazillions this Gamestop is "stealing" from the industry then, even if it sounds almost exactly like something a lot of local (physical) game-shops has been doing for the past twenty years (not even with used games, just overcharging the shit out of regular new retail games - which could equally be seen as "lost earnings" going by this thinking)..

Gamestop has around 4800 stores around the world, that's quite a chain, considering it's main purpose is undercutting retail with used games very close to their launch.

I'd say that warrants some reaction, and once again, developers are not after private used games sales, they're after the industrialization of gamestop.

Nameless Voice on 20/5/2011 at 23:24

What Papy said.

hooded_paladin on 21/5/2011 at 00:13

Quote Posted by Papy

With scenario 1 (no used games), the developer sold 20 games. With scenario 2, the developer sold 17 games.

Of course, in reality money is not the only thing which limits how many video games people buy. Time is an important factor. This means that person B will probably have enough with his 10 used games and will instead spend is $250 left for something else and the total number of game sold will be 12, not 20.

In comparison to piracy, buying a used game isn't "pointless". Which is what some are saying in this thread but it's false; 12 games sold is better than 10. I'm not concerned about the money that leaks out to third parties, that's somebody's paycheck just not the developer's.

Jason Moyer on 21/5/2011 at 00:26

Er, I'm not making an argument against buying or selling or trading used games. I'm saying the people who do it at Gamestop are fucking idiots. That's why I gave that specific example.

Nameless Voice on 21/5/2011 at 01:47

Quote Posted by hooded_paladin

That's an invalid argument, since the other guy then didn't buy 5 new games he otherwise would have. 12 sales is still less than 20.

You could also argue that pirating rubbish games gives the pirate more free money to spend on other games...

gunsmoke on 21/5/2011 at 04:55

I have yet to check a box upon installation of software on a console. Where am I agreeing to anything like what gets agreed to when you install PC software?

Jason Moyer on 21/5/2011 at 11:06

Have you ever read the fine print on the back of the boxes? I dunno how standard this is but I grabbed my NHL 2k7 box and it has this:

"For use only with Xbox video game consoles with "NTSC" designation. Unauthorized copying, reverse engineering, transmission, public performance, rental, pay for play, or circumvention of copy protection is strictly prohibited."

The full PC-like license agreement is on the last 2 pages of the manual and includes the line:

"You agree not to....B.) Distribute, lease, license, sell, rent, or otherwise transfer or assign this Software, or any copies of this Software, without the express prior written consent of the LICENSOR."

EvaUnit02 on 22/5/2011 at 19:29

You would've had a EULA-esque screen thrown at you if signed up to Xbox Live on the console itself.

You might also get one if you try recovering an existing Gamertag, but I can't confirm that.

Using an existing PSN login for the first time on a PS3/PSP console certainly throws a legal screen at you, I know for sure.